Raykov v. Crittall Casement Window Co.
Opinion of the Court
This is appeal from an order of the department of labor and industry denying petition of defendants to stop compensation.
The testimony of plaintiff and of his physician is to the effect that the disability for which the original award of compensation was made still continues. This testimony is disputed.
The finding of fact by the department, having some evidence to sustain it, is conclusive on this court.
At the hearing before the deputy commissioner, defendants raised the point that plaintiff had not answered their petition to stop compensation, and cited Rule No. 20 of the rules of the department. The record does not show this question to have been *Page 30 urged before the commission on review. Therefore it will not be considered here. Aske v. W. E. Wood Co. , 248 Mich. 327 .
Affirmed.
BUTZEL, C.J., and WIEST, McDONALD, POTTER, SHARPE, NORTH, and FEAD, JJ., concurred.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.